3 ms·

Totally agree. AFAICT, our math curriculum has been set for a hundred years by mathematicians. People who by some quirk of their upbringing were extremely stron

Totally agree. AFAICT, our math curriculum has been set for a hundred years by mathematicians. People who by some quirk of their upbringing were extremely strongly motivated to dig deep into mathematics. Naturally, the mathematicians laid out for everyone the short path to deep competence in advanced math as fast as possible. Only seems obvious to them. This path ignores the obvious fact that 99.5% of students are not intrinsically motivated to persevere through the decade-long marathon to reach PHD level math. No one in the kids’ lives ever made it clear why this is a goal worth investing in. Even their teachers don’t know. Not well enough to explain it. It’s not even assumed you grok the fun puzzle game that is math. Instead, math is presented as an unending series of seemingly arbitrary rules that all strictly build on each other, eventually leading to an end goal of… … … You are simply required to memorize these rules because if you fail you are a failure. And, maybe if you are unlucky you will utilize something more advanced than basic arithmetic twice a year for the rest of your life. The reality is that math is tremendously interesting and useful and fun. But, all the life was sucked out of it from the beginning of public education. Before the common kids had a chance to even be presented with the idea that math can be fun. We gotta turn this around. Present math as the game that is it. Not a “gamification” to artificially push you into doing things you don’t want to do. But, something that’s actually fun to do in itself.

opportune 3y ago
I don’t agree with this at all. I studied math way past high school and what you learn up until the last 2 years of a standard undergrad curriculum does not even approach what mathematicians do or care about. It’s not even putting you on the PhD track at all, to the contrary, the weird detour into calculus/statistics/non-theoretical linear algebra from an applied perspective sets you back a solid 2 years if you’re following a standard curriculum. The current math curriculum is about giving people a strong base for using math outside mathematics itself, in case they want to study physics or some other science, or engineering. Mathematicians do not generally give a shit about the computational aspect (it’s not what math is about, generally speaking) which you spend most of your time doing in math curricula until you’re at the point where further studying math suggests you are interested in math itself. The vast majority of people who struggle in math IME have at least one of two problems: one is they struggle with it and put up some mental barrier of being “bad at math”, the other is they fell behind at some point and the curriculum kept chugging along with no chance for the student to catch up (which just makes the subsequent material fail to stick and confusing). This has nothing to do with some nefarious mathematicians’ agenda and everything to do with the school system not allowing students to progress at different rates based on proficiency.
jjav 3y ago
> You are simply required to memorize these rules because if you fail you are a failure. Interesting take, completely opposite of my educational experience. I have a terrible memory for remembering random things so I always did badly in subjects that are all about memorization (like history). Math was my refuge where I excelled, as it didn't require to memorize anything. Everything could be derived by logic; I could solve all problems on the spot during tests instead of having to hope I memorized the right answers earlier. All other classes were of the form: (1) teacher presents a bunch of facts; (2) I'm supposed to memorize them all; (3) then I need to regurgitate a random sampling of them back during the test. I hated that so much. Math was the exception to that pattern, so I loved it.

opportune 3y ago

I don’t agree with this at all. I studied math way past high school and what you learn up until the last 2 years of a standard undergrad curriculum does not even approach what mathematicians do or care about. It’s not even putting you on the PhD track at all, to the contrary, the weird detour into calculus/statistics/non-theoretical linear algebra from an applied perspective sets you back a solid 2 years if you’re following a standard curriculum. The current math curriculum is about giving people a strong base for using math outside mathematics itself, in case they want to study physics or some other science, or engineering. Mathematicians do not generally give a shit about the computational aspect (it’s not what math is about, generally speaking) which you spend most of your time doing in math curricula until you’re at the point where further studying math suggests you are interested in math itself. The vast majority of people who struggle in math IME have at least one of two problems: one is they struggle with it and put up some mental barrier of being “bad at math”, the other is they fell behind at some point and the curriculum kept chugging along with no chance for the student to catch up (which just makes the subsequent material fail to stick and confusing). This has nothing to do with some nefarious mathematicians’ agenda and everything to do with the school system not allowing students to progress at different rates based on proficiency.

jjav 3y ago

> You are simply required to memorize these rules because if you fail you are a failure. Interesting take, completely opposite of my educational experience. I have a terrible memory for remembering random things so I always did badly in subjects that are all about memorization (like history). Math was my refuge where I excelled, as it didn't require to memorize anything. Everything could be derived by logic; I could solve all problems on the spot during tests instead of having to hope I memorized the right answers earlier. All other classes were of the form: (1) teacher presents a bunch of facts; (2) I'm supposed to memorize them all; (3) then I need to regurgitate a random sampling of them back during the test. I hated that so much. Math was the exception to that pattern, so I loved it.